Oregon achieves . . . together!
High School Based College Credit Partnerships
Self-Study and Peer Review
Guide
2019-2020 REVISED
Page 2 of 44
Reference List of Abbreviations
ABL Assessment-Based Learning Credit
CAO Chief Academic Officer
CIA Council of Instructional Administrators for Community Colleges
COSA Confederation of Oregon School Administrators
CPL Credit for Prior Learning
CTE Career and Technical Education
DC Dual Credit
DCC Dual Credit Coordinators
ESD Education Service District
FTE Full Time Equivalent
HECC Higher Education Coordinating Commission
HSBCCP High School Based College Credit Partnerships
IFS Inter-institutional Faculty Senate for Public Universities
NACEP National Alliance for Concurrent Enrollment Partnerships
NWCCU Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities
OAICU Oregon Alliance of Independent Colleges and Universities
OAR Oregon Administrative Rules
ODE Oregon Department of Education
ORS Oregon Revised Statute
OTAC Oregon Transfer and Articulation Committee (formerly JTAC and JBAC)
PC Provost’s Council for Public Universities
SDC Sponsored Dual Credit
Chronology of Policy Work Groups:
ALC Accelerated Learning Committee (2013-2014) per SB 222 in 2013
ALWG Accelerated Learning Work Group (2015-2016) per PC and CIA joint initiative
SSAL Sustainable Systems for Accelerated Learning (2017-2018)
Page 3 of 44
Key Terms
Accelerated Learning – Educational experiences that provide high school students with the opportunity to earn college credit while in high school. These educational experiences may occur at a college/university or as part of the high school program. In many cases, students earn both high school and college credit. Accelerated Learning has many forms in Oregon, some examples include: high school students taking courses at the college/university independently or as part of Expanded Options or other programs, Dual Credit and Advanced Placement courses. Assessment-Based Learning credit, as defined by the standards, includes a) Enhanced high school courses or other activities offered at the high school and taught by high school
teachers, b) A partnership that focuses on student attainment of specific, college- or university-defined student
learning outcomes, and, c) The opportunity for students to demonstrate, through college or university assessments, that they
have attained those student learning outcomes and thereby earn credit for a course from the sponsoring college or university. Because the student did not take the class from the sponsoring college or university, course credit earned through Assessment-Based Learning credit programs is identified on student transcripts.
Assessment Based Learning credit does not require that students follow the college or university course structure, delivery, or registration timeline but rather supports a partnership between the high school and a college or university to recognize college-level achievement that occurs as part of enhanced high school courses and activities. As such, standards do not include requirements for curriculum alignment or adherence to the registration, grading, and transcription timelines associated with taking a college or university class. Assessment Based Learning credit standards focus primarily on ensuring a thorough understanding by high school teachers of the college’s or university’s student learning outcomes, using the expertise of college or university faculty to provide a means for assessment and award of credit, and following transcription processes for credit for learning that occurred outside of taking a course from the college or university while in high school. (Note: Although there are some similarities with Credit for Prior Learning, Oregon Credit for Prior Learning is designed primarily to support adult students and focuses on experiential learning – knowledge, skills and abilities gained through life or work experience or military or other training outside of the academic environment. Assessment Based Learning is not Credit for Prior Learning.) Oregon Administrative Rule 715-017-0005 reads, “Assessment Based Learning Credit” means secondary and postsecondary credit awarded for enhanced high school courses or other activities offered at the high school, that focuses on student attainment of specific, college or university defined student learning outcomes, and the opportunity for students to demonstrate, through college or university assessments, that they have obtained those student learning outcomes and thereby are eligible to earn credit for a course from the partnering college or university. The course must be taught by a high school teacher in a secondary-postsecondary partnership that focuses on the above assessment criteria. Assessment based learning credit shall be identified on student transcripts. Assessment Based Learning Credit may include Career and Technical Education courses.
Page 4 of 44
Dual Credit, as defined by the standards, refers to a course that is a) Offered as part of the high school program, b) Taught by a high school teacher, acting as a proxy instructor for the college/university, who has been
approved by the college/university and meets the qualifications to teach the course for the college/university,
c) Sufficiently similar to the college/university course to enable the student to be described as “taking a course from the college or university”. Dual credit students enroll in the college course and grading and transcription is consistent with those of like courses at the college or university.
The Oregon Dual Credit Standards align with nationally recognized practices and very specifically focus on replicating, to the greatest extent possible, the college or university course in the high school. This includes requiring the participating high school teacher to meet the qualifications to teach the course for the college/university. Oregon Administrative Rule 715-017-0005 reads, "Dual Credit" means secondary and postsecondary credit awarded for a course offered in a high school, which course is sufficiently similar to the college or university course as to enable the enrolled students to be described as taking the course from an Oregon community college or public university as set forth in ORS 340.310. The course must be taught by a high school teacher who has been approved by the college or university and who meets the qualifications to teach the course for the college or university. Dual Credit may include Career and Technical Education courses. High school based college credit partnerships - Accelerated learning opportunities offered as part of the high school education program through partnerships between high schools and institutions of higher education utilizing dual or concurrent enrollment or other early college credit opportunities to enable students to earn and transcript college credit while in high school. This does not include courses that students take directly from the college/university while in high school, whether by coming to the college/university or having college/university faculty teach the course at the high school. Oregon Administrative Rule 715-017-0005 reads, “High School Based College Credit Partnerships” are defined as Dual Credit, Sponsored Dual Credit, and Assessment Based Learning Credit partnerships. Sponsored Dual Credit, as defined by the standards, refers to a course that is a) Offered as part of the high school program, b) Taught by a high school teacher in partnership with a sponsoring college/university faculty member
who meets the qualifications to teach the course for the college/university, and c) Sufficiently similar to the college/university course to enable the student to be described as “taking a
course from the college or university”. Sponsored Dual credit students enroll in the college course and grading and transcription is consistent with those of like courses at the college or university.
While the proposed Sponsored Dual Credit standards are modeled after the Oregon Dual Credit Standards, they broaden the options for offering college or university courses at the high school by providing explicit standards for faculty/teacher partnerships to ensure appropriate expertise, oversight and alignment. This allows a high school the opportunity to work closely with a college or university to offer these courses even though the high school may not have teachers who meet the higher education institution’s qualifications for teaching the college or university courses.
Page 5 of 44
Oregon Administrative Rule 715-017-0005 reads, “Sponsored Dual Credit” means secondary and postsecondary credit awarded for a course offered in a high school, which course is sufficiently similar to the college or university course as to enable the enrolled students to be described as taking the course from an Oregon community college or public university as set forth in ORS 340.310. The course must be taught by a high school teacher who, in partnership with a sponsoring college or university faculty member, meets the qualifications to teach the course for the college or university. Sponsored Dual Credit may include Career and Technical Education courses. Sponsoring college or university: The sponsoring college or university is the institution that is awarding and transcripting the postsecondary credit. The sponsoring college or university is responsible for ensuring compliance with accreditation, and institutional rules, standards, laws, and regulations, as well as upholding the Sponsored Dual Credit agreements with partners. If there are multiple college or university partners, each higher education institution is considered a sponsoring college or university for the courses for which it is awarding and transcripting credit. Sponsoring faculty member: The sponsoring faculty is a faculty member from the sponsoring college or university who is responsible for the college course offered and the credit awarded, and who oversees the orientation, oversight, training and implementation to ensure that the Sponsored Dual Credit courses align with the college’s or university’s courses. The sponsoring college or university is responsible for identifying a sponsoring faculty member who has the qualifications and experience to provide appropriate leadership and oversight, and who is committed to connecting, communicating and collaborating with the high school teachers and other faculty in the partnership. Program Partner: The self-study cover sheet asks for a list of program partners. For the purposes of the self-study, a program partner is the entity with which the college or university collaborates to engage with high school students and provide college credit opportunities. This could be a high school, a school district, an education service district, another partner who works with these entities such as a college access organization or a community based organization.
Page 6 of 44
Table of Contents
Reference List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................................................2
Key Terms ...................................................................................................................................................................3
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ..........................................................................................................................7
Oversight Committee for High School Based College Credit Partnerships ............................................................8
Guiding Principles Established by the Oversight Committee .................................................................................8
Educational Equity ..............................................................................................................................................8
Credits With a Purpose .......................................................................................................................................8
Implementation of the Guiding Principles .............................................................................................................9
SELF-STUDY AND PEER REVIEW PROCESS ............................................................................................................... 10
Application Instructions....................................................................................................................................... 11
Timeline: Process mapping for peer review of high school based college credit partnerships .......................... 12
Calendar of Institutional Approvals for High School Based College Credit Partnerships .................................... 14
State Staff Contact Information .......................................................................................................................... 15
Appendix I: COVER PAGE TEMPLATE ....................................................................................................................... 16
Appendix II: Assurances ........................................................................................................................................... 17
Appendix III: File Structure for Submission of Narratives and Evidence ................................................................. 18
Appendix IV: Dual Credit (DC) Standards Guide ...................................................................................................... 22
Appendix V: Sponsored Dual Credit (SDC) Standards Guide ................................................................................... 26
Appendix VI: Assessment Based Learning (ABL) Standards Guide .......................................................................... 33
Appendix VII: Rubrics for Reviewers ....................................................................................................................... 37
High school based college credit partnership – Dual Credit ............................................................................... 37
High school based college credit partnership – Sponsored Dual Credit ............................................................. 40
High school based college credit partnership – Assessment Based Learning Credit .......................................... 43
Page 7 of 44
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
Established in 2011, the Higher Education Coordinating Commission (HECC) is a 14-member volunteer
commission appointed by the Oregon Governor, with nine voting members confirmed by the State Senate. The
Commission is supported by the Higher Education Coordinating Commission state agency, comprised of eight
distinct offices. The HECC develops and implements policies and programs to ensure that Oregon’s network of
colleges, universities, workforce development initiatives and pre-college pathways are well coordinated to foster
student success.
The HECC has statutory responsibility1 for development, oversight and approval of accelerated learning
partnerships, specifically, Dual Credit, Sponsored Dual Credit, and Assessment-Based Learning Credit.
Established standards for each of these models provide specific guidelines for high school based college credit
partnerships related to curriculum, faculty, students, tuition and fees, assessments, program improvement, and
transcription and transferability of credits. The purpose of the self-study and peer review described here is to
support alignment between college/university campus offerings and high school based offerings. Academic
quality of regular campus offerings is assured by regional accreditation (NWCCU) and other assessment
measures. The HECC conducts longitudinal research on student success to ensure that programs are serving
students with the best possible academic pathways to postsecondary degrees and certificates.
Beginning in academic year 2016-2017, public institutions offering high school-based college credit programs are
required to align with the HECC adopted accelerated learning standards. Regular approval of three models of
high school-based college credit fall under a single peer review application or “self-study”. All high school based
college credit partnerships must align with the standards and provide evidence of alignment through recurring
reviews. The review calendar has been established with approval every six years and an annual program
report. This self-study and peer review process builds on best practices and includes advice and input from the
National Alliance of Concurrent Enrollment Partnerships (NACEP).
The peer review process is coordinated by HECC and ODE staff and provides for a self-study and facilitated peer
review to demonstrate continuing adherence to the Oregon Standards. The purpose of this guide is to provide
information for use by college/university staff as they work through the program approval/renewal process. This
document identifies the essential steps in the process and describes evidence required to meet the state
standards for High School Based College Credit Partnerships in Oregon.
Independent colleges and universities may participate in this process on a volunteer basis. Please contact the state staff if you are interested in participating.
1 Oregon Revised Statutes 340.310 and 341.450,
Page 8 of 44
Oversight Committee for High School Based College Credit Partnerships
Supporting the educational goals of Oregon’s 40-40-202, the Higher Education Coordinating Commission’s
statutory responsibilities, College and Career Readiness and High School Success through access to college credit
during high school, the Oversight Committee for High School Based College Credit Partnerships is convened as a
recommendation body to HECC staff, and providing support and guidance for universities and community
colleges as they develop high school based college credit partnerships. Membership of the Oversight Committee
includes both administrators, faculty and staff from the following education sectors:
− Community Colleges
− Public Universities
− K-12 High Schools
− K-12 Education Service Districts
− Private Independent Postsecondary Institutions
Oversight Committee membership is published on the HECC website: https://www.oregon.gov/highered/policy-
collaboration/Documents/High-School-College/Oversight%20Committee%20Roster%202018-2019.pdf
Guiding Principles Established by the Oversight Committee
Educational Equity and Credits with a Purpose are two principles that guide the work of ensuring that High
School Based College Credit Partnerships (HSBCCP) are connected to the broader work of education in Oregon.
These principles provide an important context for building and supporting partnership programs as we seek to
improve the educational experience and outcomes of our students.
Educational Equity – College courses in high school are designed to expose students to challenging and engaging content that promotes education and training beyond high school. High school based college credit partnerships have proven to be an effective strategy to engage students who otherwise would not consider college or other professional training beyond high school. When these students participate in college courses while in high school, they gain entry to postsecondary education with the help of their high school teachers, counselors, and peers. Currently, there are disparities in access to and outcomes for accelerated college credit, such as high school graduation, postsecondary matriculation and completion for students of color and those experiencing poverty. Participation in accelerated college credit during high school does not mirror high school student demographics and is concentrated in non-rural communities. Within each student racial/ethnic group students experiencing poverty are less likely to participate in accelerated college credit courses while in high school (Pierson, A., Hodara, M., & Luke, J, 2017) . Programs focused on equity outcomes can reduce disparities in access and success. Partnership programs are expected to collaborate with state agencies, educational counterparts, and to use disaggregated data and evidence of student success to guide program improvements with the purpose of changing and improving equity outcomes. Credits With a Purpose – All college credit transcripted to high school students is accompanied by the best
2 Oregon’s 40-40-20 Educational Goal Definition: https://www.oregon.gov/highered/about/Pages/state-goals.aspx
Page 9 of 44
possible advising structures, information for parents and students, and tools for building a post high school educational plan. As students build a college portfolio related to their educational goals, they will receive information about federal financial aid, pathways into various majors and career pathways. Programs must be designed to provide transparency around the award of credit, and credits must allow students the flexibility to be mobile in their education beyond high school. Implementation of the Guiding Principles
In support of the Committee’s two guiding principles and the state Education Equity Lens3, attention to
educational equity has been embedded in the self-study and review process. Each partnership will provide a
reflection and supporting evidence of how their high school based programming addresses educational equity
and credits with a purpose. Applicants will use these critical questions in reference to their programs during the
self-study. Improvements may include, but are not limited to, advising and other student and family supports,
recruitment, and school, college or university policy.
Evaluate your high school based college credit partnership using an equity lens by inserting the name of your
program into the blank, and brainstorming a brief yet full answer to each of the questions.
PURPOSE: What are we trying to achieve with ? How would it reduce disparities and advance
equity and inclusion? Are there better ways to do this?
INEQUITIES: Would affect different groups differently? If so, in what ways? If we don’t know, how
could we find out?
ROOT CAUSES: Why would affect some groups unequally? What could do to address these
root causes?
SUSTAINABILITY: Is realistic and adequately funded? Does it have what it needs to be successful?
Use the cover page (Appendix I) to signal to reviewers which section of the self-study will contain the evidence on guiding principles. You may reference examples of the equity reflections from previous cohorts in the SharePoint Library folder. A new infographic from REL NW is available at the following web address: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/northwest/pdf/accelerated-learning.pdf
3 Oregon Education Equity Lens: https://www.oregon.gov/highered/about/Documents/Commission/COMMISSION/2017/08-August-9-10/4.0d%20Equity%20Lens-reformat.pdf
Page 10 of 44
SELF-STUDY AND PEER REVIEW PROCESS
The Oregon approval process provides for a programmatic self-study to demonstrate continuing assurance that
the Oregon Standards are being met every six years. Oregon’s process has been designed to provide
transparency around alignment between campus and high school educational offerings. All high school based
credits must align with one of the three models for which HECC has adopted standards and all offerings must be
included in the self-study and subsequent report. The institutional self-study must include all Lower Division
Collegiate and Career and Technical Education offerings for which college credit is awarded to high school
students.
The peer reviewers will evaluate whether a program has practices, policy and procedures that document
alignment with Oregon’s standards. Coordinated by HECC Staff, applications will be examined by teams of
reviewers who are representative of accelerated learning programs around the state. The reviewers will provide
recommendations to a review team lead. The review team lead will synthesize review team feedback and make
a recommendation to the Oversight Committee. HECC staff will coordinate communication with the applicants,
including feedback from the Oversight Committee for High School Based College Credit Partnerships and letters
of approval and renewal issued by the Executive Director of the Higher Education Coordinating Commission.
The self-study and peer review of high school based college credit partnerships includes an overall summary
narrative of each standard category (Curriculum, Faculty, Students, Assessment, etc.) and a presentation of
evidence for each standard with the option to include a brief text explaining the relationship of the evidence
provided to the standard.) Refer to the table in Appendix III of this Guide (p. 19) for the file tree that can be used
as a check list to prepare for the final self-study submission.
In summary, a self-study and annual reports are generated by each institution covering all of their high school
based college credit offerings. The submission process will be online, as will be the peer review. The peer
reviewers will document feedback for each institution and HECC staff will coordinate between the applicants,
the online system, reviewers, and agency leadership.
The Higher Education Coordinating Commission (HECC) will provide results to each institution upon completion of the peer review. Self-studies for peer review of partnerships are required from public colleges and universities as of May 2018. The materials are submitted to HECC staff through a designated online platform (SharePoint). Note: Programs that are NACEP accredited are considered to have met the Oregon Standards and are exempt from this process. The NACEP letter of accreditation in these cases is submitted in place of the self-study. If institutions offer other models of high school based credit beyond programs that are NACEP accredited they shall submit a self-study for those other models.
Page 11 of 44
Application Instructions
Information in this guide is intended to serve as a tool to help institutions prepare for the online submission.
Institutions will follow the steps below:
Self Study
1. Participate in an fall application overview workshop hosted by HECC and ODE staff for your cohort
(Cohorts are listed in the chart on page 12)
2. Complete the application cover-sheet with institution and contact information (see Appendix I).
3. Complete partnership summary narrative with a general overview of your programs for current context
to the peer review team.
4. Apply the equity lens by selecting a category (student or program improvement) to examine using the
equity lens and state your selection on the cover page
5. Prepare a narrative for each category and evidence (documentation/examples) for each of the standards
and upload the following information to the online review platform:
a) For each category (i.e. Curriculum, Faculty, Students, Assessment), provide a brief narrative
describing how your partnership(s) ensure alignment between the college and the high school.
b) For each standard (i.e. C1, A2, S3) u provide evidence and an optional brief description for each
artifact (evidence document) about how it demonstrates alignment with the standards. Clearly state
how the documents are accessed by students, faculty, partners, and staff. Documents must be provided
within the electronic file structure and naming conventions provided (See Appendix III). If you have
alternative evidence that is different from that which is recommended, please submit it for
consideration by the peer review committee. As needed, an additional explanation narrative can be
uploaded for each standard, under each category, within each model. Narratives clarify to the reviewers
how your evidence documents relate to the standard.
6. Complete and gather signatures for the Assurances page (see Appendix II).
7. Submit completed application to HECC using the online platform for file sharing.
The following flow chart provides a visual summary of the self study and peer review process.
Page 12 of 44
Timeline: Process mapping for peer review of high school based college credit partnerships
Preparation: State staff will convene members of Cohort 3 in August 2019 to distribute guidebooks, introduce members to each other and answer questions. Additional Cohort 3 meetings and trainings will be provided as needed throughout the 2019-2020 school year. 1 Self Study
• Partnerships complete the self-study by May 1, 2020 if their high school based programming fits the
definitions of partnerships per OAR 715.017.0005 or provide proof of NACEP accreditation.
• Submission of self-studies are based on a calendar that includes all public institutions divided into 3
cohort groups.
• Failure to submit a self-study by the due date would lead to a partnership being considered out of
compliance.
2 Completeness Check
• State staff conduct completeness check to ensure that a) Evidence has been submitted for each
standard and b) Narrative has been submitted for each category.
• Additional narrative and evidence is provided as necessary by partnership, evidence must relate to each
of the standards. Where suggested/required evidence is not available, the partnership may submit their
own narrative and evidence as to how the partnership is meeting the intent of the standard.
• Failure to provide requested evidence to ensure self study is complete and ready for peer review would
lead to a partnership being considered out of compliance.
3 Peer Review
• Self-studies are peer reviewed by a team of reviewers who assess the evidence provided against the
standards using a rubric.
• Feedback to the partnership under review is synthesized by a review team lead.
• Review team lead makes a recommendation to approve or conditionally approve the partnership for the
specific models of high school based college credit partnership for which it was reviewed.
4 Approval/Conditional Approval
• Oversight Committee considers, discusses and votes on the recommendation of the review team lead.
• Staff compile the outcomes of the peer review and vote, then issue notification of approval or
conditional approval to partnerships.
• Partnerships may appeal (in writing) the decision of the Oversight Committee.
5 Conditional Approvals
• Conditional Approvals are handled on a case-by-case bases, and a timeline (3-12months) is established
for each conditionally approved partnership to submit additional evidence only in the areas that have
been identified to not meet the standard(s).
Page 13 of 44
• State staff conduct completeness check to ensure that a) Evidence has been submitted for each
conditionally approved area and b) Narrative has been updated for each conditionally approved
category.
• Failure to submit the requested evidence on conditional approval on the established timeline would lead
to a partnership being considered out of compliance.
• Additional evidence is reviewed by (preferably) the same review team, and the review team lead makes
a subsequent recommendation to the Oversight Committee.
• Oversight Committee considers, discusses and votes on the recommendation of the review team lead.
• Staff compile the outcomes of the peer review and vote, then issue notification of approval or non-
approval to partnerships.
• Partnerships may appeal (in writing) the decision of the Oversight Committee.
6 Appeal
• Written appeals from partnerships are addressed to state staff and outline the reason for the appeal;
appeals may include additional evidence documents that show how a partnership meets the standards.
• Appeals are handled on a case-by-case basis by staff in consultation with the Oversight Committee, and
a timeline is established for each appeal process to arrive at a resolution (1-3 months to submit appeal &
any additional evidence, 1-3 additional months for resolution of appeal).
• During appeal process, a partnership is not considered out of compliance.
7 Reinstatement
• When and if a partnership fails to gain approval or conditional approval, it is considered out of
compliance.
• A partnership that is out of compliance may become compliant/approved by preparing and submitting a
full self-study for peer review. The review would then take place in the next year.
• Partnerships that are not in compliance with the state standards for high school based college credit
partnerships will not receive state higher education dollars for the enrollments in those programs for
the period that the partnership is not in compliance.
• The HECC and the State Board of Education will publicize the results of the peer reviews annually with a
list of approved, conditionally approved, and non-approved programs.
Page 14 of 44
Calendar of Institutional Approvals for High School Based College Credit Partnerships
Institution Name Partnership Models Approval Status and Date Next Review
Blue Mountain Community College
Dual Credit Approved, 2013* 2020
Central Oregon Community College
Dual Credit, Sponsored Dual Credit
Approved, 2018 2024
Chemeketa Community College Dual Credit Approved, 2019 2025
Clackamas Community College Dual Credit, Sponsored Dual Credit
Approved, 2019 2025
Clatsop Community College Dual Credit Approved, 2013* 2020
Columbia Gorge Community College
Dual Credit Approved, 2013* 2020
Eastern Oregon University Sponsored Dual Credit Approved, 2018 2024
Klamath Community College Dual Credit Approved, 2013* 2020
Lane Community College Dual Credit, Sponsored Dual Credit
Approved, 2018 2024
Linn-Benton Community College Sponsored Dual Credit Approved, 2018 2024
Mt. Hood Community College Dual Credit Approved, 2013* 2020
Oregon Institute of Technology Dual Credit, Sponsored Dual Credit
Approved, 2019 2025
Oregon State University - N/A 2021
Oregon Coast Community College
Dual Credit Prov. Approved, 2015* 2020
Portland Community College Dual Credit Approved, 2011* 2020
Portland State University Dual Credit, Sponsored Dual Credit
Approved, 2018 2024
Rogue Community College Dual Credit Conditionally Approved, 2019
2020
Southern Oregon University Dual Credit Approved, 2019 2025
Southwestern Oregon Community College
Dual Credit, Sponsored Dual Credit
Conditionally Approved, 2019
2020
Tillamook Bay Community College
Sponsored Dual Credit Approved, 2019 2025
Treasure Valley Community College
Dual Credit Approved, 2016* 2020
Umpqua Community College Dual Credit, Sponsored Dual Credit
Approved, 2019 2025
University of Oregon - N/A 2021
Warner Pacific University Dual Credit N/A 2021
Western Oregon University Assessment Based Learning Approved, 2018 2024
* Indicates partnership approved by the Dual Credit Oversight Committee (2010-2016)
Page 15 of 44
State Staff Contact Information
For questions about this self-study and peer review process, please contact state staff
NAME TITLE ORGANIZATION SECTOR EMAIL
Erin Weeks-Earp Alignment and Articulation Policy Specialist
HECC, Public University Coordination
Public University
Eric Juenemann Career Connected Learning Specialist
HECC, Community Colleges and Workforce Development
Community College
Pandie Anderson Personalized and Accelerated Learning Specialist
Department of Education
K-12 [email protected]
Lillian White High School Success Specialist
Department of Education
K-12 [email protected]
OAR 715-017-0005 https://secure.sos.state.or.us/oard/viewSingleRule.action?ruleVrsnRsn=254468
ORS 340.310 https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors340.html
340.310 Statewide standards for dual credit programs; report.
(1) The Higher Education Coordinating Commission shall develop statewide standards for dual credit programs
to be implemented by public high schools, community colleges and public universities listed in ORS 352.002. The
standards must establish the manner by which:
(a) A student in any grade from 9 through 12 may, upon completion of a course, earn course credit both for
high school and for a community college or public university; and
(b) Teachers of courses that are part of a dual credit program will work together to determine the quality of
the program and to ensure the alignment of the content, objectives and outcomes of individual courses.
(2) Each public high school, community college and public university that provides a dual credit program must
implement the statewide standards developed under subsection (1) of this section.
(3) Each school district, community college and public university that provides a dual credit program shall submit
an annual report to the Higher Education Coordinating Commission on the academic performance of students
enrolled in a dual credit program. The Higher Education Coordinating Commission shall establish the required
contents of the report, which must provide sufficient information to allow the commission to determine the
quality of the dual credit program.
[2011 c.639 §2; 2012 c.104 §10; 2013 c.768 §134; 2014 c.23 §1]
Page 16 of 44
Appendix I: COVER PAGE TEMPLATE
Self-Study of High School Based College Credit Partnerships
Applicant: Insert Institution Name Here
[Insert institution logo here] Applicant contact information Name: __________________________________ Email: __________________________________ Phone Number: ___________________________________ Title: __________________________ Application Overview for Peer Review Team Please check the model(s) you are submitting for review:
o Dual Credit o Sponsored Dual Credit o Assessment Based Learning Credit (ABL)
Equity Lens: Selected Category of Standards
o Student o Program Improvement o All
High School Based College Credit Partnerships Summary Please insert a brief overview of your program(s) in order to provide context to the peer reviewers. Please limit this narrative to 300-500 words. Content to consider in your narrative may include: brief history and purpose of your program(s), main goals, unique aspects of partnership(s), local context of program(s), and known outcomes. Please include how long each program model has been offered (dates), geographic service area, the number of schools participating, the number of teachers approved for the model (if Dual Credit or Sponsored Dual Credit), and list of program partners. Equity Reflection Summary Each partnership will provide a reflection and supporting evidence of how their high school based programming addresses educational equity and credits with a purpose. Applicants will use these critical questions in reference to their programs during the self-study. Improvements may include, but are not limited to, advising and other student and family supports, recruitment, and school, college or university policy.
Page 17 of 44
Appendix II: Assurances
The High School Based College Credit Partnership self-study provides for signature by the Chief Academic Officer, President, or Provost. This person assures that the following requirements are met:
● The program described in the application has been approved by the college/university, ● State and federal laws and the Oregon Standards have been met, and ● The self-study is complete and ready to be reviewed by peer reviewers.
College Authority Signature
(Applications must be signed by the chief academic officer, president, or provost)
I, (college/university CAO or President or Provost) have reviewed this application and supporting documents and attest to the accuracy, clarity, and completeness. The college/university will comply with the following assurances:
1. Oversight. The college/university will provide curriculum and assessment guidance through a formal agreement with high school partners.
2. Access. The high school is responsible to provide access, accommodations, flexibility, and additional/supplemental services for special populations and protected classes of students.
3. Continuous improvement. The college/university has assessment, evaluation, feedback, and continuous improvement processes or systems in place. There are opportunities for input from and concerning the instructor(s), students, employers, and other partners/stakeholders.
4. Program records maintenance & congruence. The college/university acknowledges that the records concerning the program title, curriculum, credit hours, and other identifying and descriptive information will remain consistent with the program renewal status that is approved.
5. Sustainability. The college/university has processes/resources committed to ensure ongoing support of the program.
Our staff has worked with HECC staff in the development of the program and completion of this application. The accelerated learning program(s) described in this application:
● Has been approved by the appropriate institutional board;
● Complies with all local campus procedures; and
● Is considered ready to be reviewed and to meet HECC standards for accelerated learning programs in Oregon.
It is understood that HECC staff may request documentation or evidence if additional information is needed. Signature___________________________________ Date________________________________ Name______________________________________ Title_________________________________
Page 18 of 44
Appendix III: File Structure for Submission of Narratives and Evidence
Category and standard area
Dual Credit Sponsored Dual Credit Assessment Based Learning Credit
Curriculum o Narrative about curriculum alignment
College Courses o DC-C1 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional DC-C1 explanation (approx. 50 words)
o SDC-C1 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional SDC-C1 explanation (approx. 50 words)
o ABL-R2 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional ABL-R2 explanation (approx. 50 words)
Transcripted Credits o DC-C2 Evidence
Document(s)
o Optional DC-C2 explanation (approx. 50 words)
o SDC-C2 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional SDC-C2 explanation (approx. 50 words)
o ABL-TR1 and TR2 Evidence Documents
o Optional ABL-TR1 explanation (approx. 50 words)
o Optional ABL-TR2 explanation (approx. 50 words)
Department Philosophy
o DC-C3 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional DC-C3 explanation (approx. 50 words)
o SDC-C3 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional SDC-C3 explanation (approx. 50 words)
n/a
Learning Outcomes & Assessments
n/a
o SDC-C4 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional SDC-C4 explanation (approx. 50 words)
o SDC-C5 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional SDC-C5 explanation (approx. 50 words)
o ABL-R1 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional ABL-R1 explanation (approx. 50 words)
Faculty o Narrative about faculty qualifications
Qualifications o DC-F1 Evidence
Document(s)
o Optional DC-F1 explanation (approx. 50 words)
o SDC-F1 Evidence Documents
o Optional SDC-F1 explanation (approx. 50 words)
n/a
Orientation o DC-F2 Evidence
Document(s) o SDC-F2 Evidence
Document(s)
o ABL-R3 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional ABL-R3 explanation (approx. 50 words)
Page 19 of 44
o Optional DC-F2 explanation (approx. 50 words)
o Optional SDC-F2 explanation (approx. 50 words)
Collegial Interaction
o DC-F3 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional DC-F3 explanation (approx. 50 words)
o SDC-F3 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional SDC-F3 explanation (approx. 50 words)
n/a
Non-Compliance o DC-F4 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional DC-F4 explanation (approx. 50 words)
o SDC-F4 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional SDC-F4 explanation (approx. 50 words)
o ABL-R1 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional ABL-R1 explanation (approx. 50 words)
Aggregate Capacity & Qualifications n/a
o SDC-F5 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional SDC-F5 explanation (approx. 50 words)
n/a
Feedback Loop
n/a
o SDC-F6 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional SDC-F6 explanation (approx. 50 words)
n/a
Resources
n/a
o SDC-F7 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional SDC-F7 explanation (approx. 50 words)
n/a
Student o Narrative about student supports
Enrollment o DC-S1 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional DC-S1 explanation (approx. 50 words)
o SDC-S1 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional SDC-S1 explanation (approx. 50 words)
n/a
Pre-Requisites o DC-S2 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional DC-S2 explanation (approx. 50 words)
o SDC-S2 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional SDC-S2 explanation (approx. 50 words)
n/a
Student Rights and Responsibilities
o DC-S3 Evidence Document(s)
o SDC-S3 Evidence Document(s)
o ABL-R4 Evidence Document(s)
Page 20 of 44
o Optional DC-S3 explanation (approx. 50 words)
o Optional SDC-S3 explanation (approx. 50 words)
o Optional ABL-R4 explanation
(approx. 50 words)
Page 21 of 44
Assessment o Narrative about alignment of assessments
Alignment of Assessment
o DC-A1 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional DC-A1 explanation (approx. 50 words)
o SDC-A1 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional SDC-A1 explanation (approx. 50 words)
o ABL-A1 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional ABL-A1 explanation (approx. 50 words)
Faculty Involvement in Assessment
n/a n/a o ABL-A2 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional ABL-A2 explanation (approx. 50 words)
Transcription & Transfer o Narrative about transcription and transfer
Transcripts
n/a n/a o ABL-TR1 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional ABL-TR1 explanation (approx. 50 words)
Student Records
n/a n/a o ABL-TR2 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional ABL-TR2 explanation (approx. 50 words)
Information & Transparency of Transfer
n/a n/a
o ABL-TR3 and TR4 Evidence Document(s)
o Optional ABL-TR3 explanation (approx. 50 words)
o Optional ABL-TR4 explanation (approx. 50 words)
Program Improvement o Narrative about program improvement
Continuous Improvement
o DC-PI Evidence Document(s)
o Optional DC-PI explanation (approx. 50 words)
o SDC-PI Evidence Document(s)
o Optional SDC-PI explanation (approx. 50 words)
o Optional Evidence Document(s)
o Optional explanation (approx. 50 words)
Page 22 of 44
Appendix IV: Dual Credit (DC) Standards Guide
Standard Descriptor Evidence required/ What reviewers look
for
CURRICULUM: Describe how your Dual Credit program engages your partner high schools to ensure that college
or university courses taught at the high schools meet all of the college or university curriculum expectations in
the standards below.
Curriculum 1
(DC-C1)
College Courses
College or university courses administered
through a Dual Credit Program are cataloged
courses and approved through the regular
course approval process of the sponsoring
college and/or university. These courses have
the same departmental designation, number,
title, and credits as their college counterparts,
and they adhere to the same course
descriptions.
Dual credit course offerings are listed in
college catalog.
● List of articulated courses: including
course number and title, and credits
● Link to college or university catalog
Curriculum 2
(DC-C2)
Transcripted
Credits
College or university courses administered
through a Dual Credit Program are recorded
on the official academic record for students at
the sponsoring college or university.
Dual credit students receive a college or
university transcript.
● Statement in the student guide on
how to get the transcript. List page
number and/or give link to the
specific page in the student guide
Curriculum 3
(DC-C3)
Department
Philosophy
College or university courses administered
through a Dual Credit Program reflect the
pedagogical, theoretical and philosophical
orientation of the college’s or university’s
sponsoring academic departments.
Alignment among pedagogical approaches:
● 3 sets of paired syllabi in different
subject areas from high school and
college or university faculty
demonstrating alignment
● Statement of how college or
university builds curriculum
alignment between high school and
college or university
Page 23 of 44
Standard Descriptor Evidence Required/ What
reviewers look for
FACULTY: Describe the process your Dual Credit program uses to approve high school teachers for Dual Credit
and to facilitate ongoing collegial interaction between approved high school teachers and the colleges or
university’s faculty and administration.
Faculty 1
(DC-F1)
Qualifications
Instructors teaching college or university
courses through Dual Credit meet the academic
requirements for faculty and instructors
teaching in the college or university.
Alignment of faculty and high school
instructor qualifications.
● Document (with link) outlining
specific instructor requirements,
how Dual Credit teachers qualify,
and who reviews and approves
new teachers
Faculty 2
(DC-F2)
Orientation
The college or university provides high school
instructors with training and orientation in
course curriculum, assessment criteria, course
philosophy, and Dual Credit administrative
requirements before certifying the instructors
to teach the college or university courses.
Required orientations or trainings for
new Dual Credit teachers.
● Agenda(s) for trainings and/or
● Meeting notes and/or
● Administrative requirements
Faculty 3
(DC-F3)
Collegial Interaction
Instructors teaching Dual Credit sections are
part of a continuing collegial interaction
through professional development, access to
essential academic resources, seminars, site
visits, and ongoing communication with the
college’s or university’s faculty and Dual Credit
administrators. This interaction must occur
before teaching the course and at least
annually and address issues such as course
content, course delivery, assessment,
evaluation, and professional development in
the field of study.
Ongoing collegial interaction in the
field of study between college or
university faculty and dual credit
teachers.
● Agenda(s) for trainings and/or
● Meeting notes and/or
● Other records
Faculty 4
(DC-F4)
Non-Compliance
Dual Credit Program policies address instructor
non-compliance with the college’s or
university’s expectations for courses offered
through the Dual Credit Program (for example,
non-participation in Dual Credit Program
training and/or activities).
Plan for addressing faculty and/or dual
credit teacher’s noncompliance with
program policy.
● Copy of the published policy and
expectations. If in a manual, give
page number along with link;
Provide a description of how this
policy is shared
Page 24 of 44
Standard Descriptor Evidence Required/ What
reviewers look for
STUDENT: Describe how you communicate with students to ensure they understand the rights and
responsibilities of being a college student, including the importance of registering for the college or
university course, what it means to build a permanent college transcript, and how the college credits effect
their long-term educational and career goals.
Student 1
(DC-S1)
Enrollment
The college or university officially
registers or admits Dual Credit Program
students as degree-seeking, non-degree
seeking, or non-matriculated students of
the college or university and records
courses administered through a Dual
Credit Program on official sponsoring
college or university transcripts.
Enrollment process is aligned between college or university and dual credit courses. ● Letter or statement from registrar
documenting how high school
students register in the college or
university course, or registration
instructions for students
● Published Add/Drop/Withdrawal
dates for dual credit course reflecting
alignment to the college course
registration dates
● Comprehensive costs to students
must be transparent
Student 2
(DC-S2)
Pre-Requisites
Colleges or universities outline specific
course requirements and prerequisites
for students.
Pre-requisites for courses are
transparent.
● Course Syllabus, program manual,
and/or student guide
●
Student 3
(DC-S3)
Student Rights and
Responsibilities
High school students are provided with a
student guide that outlines students’
rights and responsibilities as well as
providing guidelines for the transfer of
credit and credits with a purpose.
Published students’ rights and
responsibilities.
● Student guide
● Course Syllabus
● Information on the transfer of credit
including how students order
transcripts and how to transfer
credits from one institution to
another with a goal to help students
understand how college credit works
● College or university contact person
Page 25 of 44
Standard Descriptor Evidence Required/What reviewers
look for
ASSESSMENT: Describe how your Dual Credit program ensures that students are assessed comparably to
their college or university counterparts.
Assessment 1
(DC-A1)
Alignment of
Assessment
The college/university ensures concurrent enrollment students’ proficiency of learning outcomes is measured using comparable grading
standards and assessment methods to
on campus sections.
Required Evidence: 1. A Statement of Equivalency written by each discipline’s faculty liaison that follows the NACEP Statement of Equivalency Guidelines. A standard response is not appropriate. 2. Paired student assessment tools from on-campus and concurrent enrollment sections – one paired example from each discipline for side-by-side comparisons (such as final exam, lab exercise, essay, assignment, or grading rubric.
Standard Descriptor Evidence Required /What
reviewers look for
IMPROVEMENT: Describe how your Dual Credit program administers and uses end-of-term student
course evaluations for program improvement.
Continuous
Improvement
(DC-PI)
Continuous
Improvement
The college or university conducts an end-
of-term student course evaluation for
courses offered through the Dual Credit
Program. The course evaluation is
intended to influence program
improvement rather than instructor
evaluation. Names (of the instructor or
students) should not be included in the
evaluation.
Continuous Program Improvement.
● Evaluation form (a blank one)
● Report of feedback
● Brief narrative of how your
program is using course evaluation
data to improve the program
Page 26 of 44
Appendix V: Sponsored Dual Credit (SDC) Standards Guide
Standard Descriptor Evidence Required/ What
reviewers look for
CURRICULUM: Describe how your Sponsored Dual Credit program engages with your partner high
schools to ensure that college or university courses taught at the high schools meet all of the college or
university curriculum expectations in the standards below.
Curriculum 1
(SDC-C1)
College Courses
College or university courses administered
through a Sponsored Dual Credit Program are
cataloged courses and approved through the
regular course approval process of the
sponsoring college and/or university. These
courses have the same departmental
designation, number, title, and credits as their
college counterparts, and they adhere to the
same course descriptions and student learning
outcomes.
Dual credit course offerings are
listed in college catalog.
● List of articulated courses:
including course number and
title, and credits
● Link to college or university
catalog
Curriculum 2
(SDC-C2)
Transcripted
Credits
College or university courses administered
through a Sponsored Dual Credit Program are
administered in a manner that is consistent with
like courses at the sponsoring college or
university and recorded similarly on the official
academic record for the sponsoring college or
university.
Dual credit students receive a
college or university transcript.
● Statement in the student guide
on how to get the transcript
● List page number and/or give
link to the specific page in the
student guide
Curriculum 3
(SDC-C3)
Department
Philosophy
College or university courses administered
through a Sponsored Dual Credit Program reflect
the pedagogical, theoretical and philosophical
orientation of the sponsoring college or
university department/program where the
credit will be awarded.
Alignment among pedagogical
approaches:
● 3 sets of paired syllabi in
different subject areas from
high school and college or
university faculty
demonstrating alignment
● Statement of how college or
university builds curriculum
alignment between high
school and college or
university
Page 27 of 44
Standard Descriptor Evidence Required /What reviewers
look for
Curriculum 4 (SDC-C4)
Alignment of Learning
Outcomes
(Specific to SDC) The syllabi for college or
university courses administered through a
Sponsored Dual Credit program are
consistent with the syllabi from the
sponsoring college or university and
include clearly defined learning outcomes
and student expectations. Syllabi are
reviewed and approved by the academic
faculty in the partnership from the
sponsoring college or university
department/program where the credit will
be awarded.
Alignment of learning outcomes and
student expectations with faculty
approved syllabi:
● 3 sets of paired syllabi in different
subject areas from high school and
college or university faculty
demonstrating alignment of learning
outcomes and student expectations.
● Evidence of review and approval
process
Curriculum 5 (SDC-C5)
Alignment of Curriculum
and Assessment
(Specific to SDC) Credits for college or
university courses administered through a
Sponsored Dual Credit Program are
awarded based on documented student
achievement consistent with the student
learning outcomes and course content.
Alignment of assessment with course
curriculum.
● Sample assessment(s) showing
evidence that students demonstrate
the learning outcomes of the college
or university course
Page 28 of 44
Standard Descriptor Evidence Required /What
reviewers look for
FACULTY: Describe the process your Sponsored Dual Credit program uses to approve high school teachers for
Sponsored Dual Credit and to facilitate ongoing collegial interaction between approved high school teachers
and the college’s or university’s faculty and administration.
Faculty 1
(SDC-F1)
Qualifications
High school teachers teaching college or university
courses as part of a Sponsored Dual Credit Program are
approved and authorized by the sponsoring college or
university in accordance with corresponding
institutional policies, procedures and practices.
Alignment of faculty and high school
instructor qualifications.
● Document (with link) outlining
specific instructor requirements,
how Sponsored Dual Credit
teachers qualify, and who
reviews and approves new
teachers and participates in the
faculty selection process at the
high school level
● Sponsoring college provides
guidelines for co-teaching as is
applicable in the partnership.
Note: Co-teaching is not a
requirement for SDC, but an
option.
Faculty 2
(SDC-F2)
Orientation
The sponsoring college or university provides high
school teachers in Sponsored Dual Credit Programs
with training and orientation in course curriculum,
assessment criteria, course philosophy, and Sponsored
Dual Credit administrative requirements before they
begin to teach the college or university courses.
Sponsoring college or university
provides required orientations or
trainings for new Sponsored Dual
Credit teachers.
● Agenda(s) for trainings and/or
● Meeting notes and/or
● Other records
Faculty 3
(SDC-F3)
Collegial
Interaction
The sponsoring college or university has a well-
documented process for regular, ongoing, and
substantive interaction between high school teachers
and college or university faculty in Sponsored Dual
Credit Programs to address student learning outcomes,
course content, delivery, and assessment to maintain
consistency across course sections offered by the
college or university. This interaction occurs at least
once a quarter/semester.*
Ongoing collegial interaction in the
field of study between college or
university faculty and Sponsored Dual
Credit teachers.
● Agenda(s) for trainings and/or ● Meeting notes and/or ● Other records
Page 29 of 44
Standard Descriptor Evidence Required /What
reviewers look for
Faculty 4
(SDC-F4)
Non-
Compliance
Sponsored Dual Credit Program policies at each
sponsoring college or university address teacher non-
compliance with the college’s or university’s
expectations for courses offered through Sponsored
Dual Credit Programs (for example, non-participation in
Sponsored Dual Credit Program training and/or
activities). Such policies clearly define the impact of
non-compliance, including the effect on awarding
college or university credit.
Process for addressing faculty and or
Sponsored Dual Credit teacher
noncompliance with program
policies.
● Copy of the published policy and
expectations; if in a manual, give
page number along with link
● provide a description of how this
policy is shared
Faculty 5
(SDC-F5)
Aggregate
Capacity &
Qualifications
Teaching partnerships within Sponsored Dual Credit
Programs demonstrate that the aggregate of the
teaching roles within the partnership provides
appropriate expertise in the content or professional
area, and performs the duties, responsibilities and
functions of traditional faculty, based upon clearly
stated criteria, qualifications, and procedures.
Sponsoring faculty members have clearly defined
authority and responsibility and exercise a major role in
the design, approval, and implementation of the
teaching partnerships.
Partnership that outlines
responsibilities of the high school
teacher and the role of sponsoring
faculty.
● Description of the roles and
responsibilities of the Sponsored
Dual Credit high school teachers
● Description of the roles and
responsibilities of sponsoring
faculty; demonstrate the major
role of sponsoring faculty
● Written criteria, qualifications,
and procedures for teaching
partners (May be present in F1)
Faculty 6
(SDC-F6)
Feedback
Loop
High school teachers teaching college or university
classes as part of a Sponsored Dual Credit Program
receive feedback for continuous improvement to
ensure that student learning outcomes, course content,
and assessment are consistent with the sponsoring
college’s or university's course, as determined by
institutional policies, procedures and practices.
Comparable methods of instructor
feedback and opportunities for
professional learning and growth.
● Institutional process to provide
feedback to the Sponsored Dual
Credit high school teacher
● Examples of professional learning
and growth: for example
collaboratively looking at student
work, redacted observation notes
Page 30 of 44
Faculty 7
(SDC-F7)
Resources
High school teachers teaching college or university
courses in a Sponsored Dual Credit Program have
access to essential academic resources comparable to
those used in other sections of the same courses
offered by the sponsoring college or university as
deemed appropriate by faculty in the
department/program where credit will be awarded.
Comparable access for high school
teachers to essential academic
resources.
● Examples of resources provided
for all Sponsored Dual Credit
courses. (This may include library,
lab, learning management
system…)
● A Sponsored Dual credit
agreement, course syllabi, or SDC
manual. Cite page number *College or university faculty partners may determine that more interactions are appropriate, based on the high school teacher’s level of
expertise, teaching experience, and experience working in Sponsored Dual Credit Programs. However, in all cases, the interaction must
occur at least once a quarter/semester.
Page 31 of 44
Standard Descriptor Evidence Required /What
reviewers look for
STUDENTS: Describe how you communicate with students to ensure they understand the rights and
responsibilities of being a college student, including the importance of registering for the college or
university course, what it means to build a permanent college transcript, and how the college credits
affect their long-term educational and career goals.
Students 1
(SDC-S1)
Enrollment
The sponsoring college or university
officially registers or admits Sponsored Dual
Credit Program students as degree-seeking,
non-degree seeking, or non-matriculated
students of the college or university and
records courses administered through a
Sponsored Dual Credit Program on official
sponsoring college or university transcripts.
Registration, grading, and transcription
procedures and timelines are reasonably
consistent with those for other students
taking the same courses from the
sponsoring college or university.
Enrollment process is aligned
between college or university and
dual credit courses.
● Document how a student
registers in the college or
university course
● Add/Drop/Withdrawal dates for
dual credit and demonstrates
alignment to the college course
registration dates
● How comprehensive costs are
communicated to students;
must be transparent.
Students 2
(SDC-S2)
Prerequisites
The sponsoring college or university outlines
specific course requirements and
prerequisites for students in Sponsored Dual
Credit Programs.
Documents demonstrating
communication of specific course
requirements and prerequisites for
students.
● Course syllabus, program
manual, and/or student guide
Students 3
(SDC-S3)
Student Rights
and
Responsibilities
High school students in Sponsored Dual
Credit Programs are provided with a student
guide that outlines students’ rights and
responsibilities and provides guidelines for
the transfer of credit and credits with a
purpose.
Published students’ rights and
responsibilities.
● Student guide
● Course syllabus
● Information on the transfer of
credit including how students
order transcripts and how to
transfer credits from one
institution to another with a
goal to help students
understand how college credit
works
Page 32 of 44
Standard Descriptor Evidence Required / What
reviewers look for
ASSESSMENT: Describe how your Sponsored Dual Credit program ensures that students are assessed
comparably to their college or university counterparts.
Assessment 1
(SDC-A1)
Alignment of
Assessment
The college/university ensures concurrent enrollment students’ proficiency of learning outcomes is measured using comparable grading standards and assessment methods to on campus sections.
Required Evidence: 1. A Statement of Equivalency written by each discipline’s faculty liaison that follows the NACEP
Statement of Equivalency
Guidelines. A standard response is not appropriate. 2. Paired student assessment tools from on-campus and concurrent enrollment sections – one paired example from each discipline for side-by-side comparisons (such as final exam, lab exercise, essay, assignment, or grading rubric).
Standard Descriptor Evidence Required / What
reviewers look for
IMPROVEMENT: Describe how your Sponsored Dual Credit program administers and uses end-of-
term student course evaluations for program improvement.
Continuous
Improvement
(SDC-CI)
Continuous
Improvement
The sponsoring college or university
conducts an end-of-term student course
evaluation for courses offered through a
Sponsored Dual Credit Program. The
course evaluation is intended to
influence program improvement rather
than instructor evaluation. Names (of the
instructor or students) should not be
included in the evaluation.
Continuous Program Improvement
● Evaluation form (a blank one)
● Report of feedback
● Brief narrative of how your
program is using course
evaluation data to improve the
program
Page 33 of 44
Appendix VI: Assessment Based Learning (ABL) Standards Guide
Standard Descriptor Evidence Required /What
reviewers look for
REQUISITES: Describe how your Assessment Based Learning Credit policies, procedures, and
processes are communicated and implemented.
Requisites 1
(ABL-R1)
Institutional
Policy
The college or university has policies and
procedures for awarding Assessment-based
Learning credit. The policies and procedures
are transparent to participating students,
teachers, faculty, and staff.
Process for awarding and
transcripting Assessment Based
Learning credit.
● Copy of college or university
policies and procedures about
Assessment Based Learning.
● Demonstrates where/how that
policy is shared
● Examples can be found in
student guide, faculty guide;
website with specific links or
page numbers
Requisites 2
(ABL-R2)
College Courses
Academic credit is awarded and transcripted
only for cataloged courses formally approved
through the college or university’s regular
course approval process. Credit must be
directly applicable to meet requirements for
general education, a certificate, a degree or
electives as outlined in college publications.
Assessment Based Learning credit
course offerings are listed in
college or university catalog.
● List of articulated courses:
including course number, title,
and number of credits
● Link to current college or
university catalog of courses
Requisites 3
(ABL-R3)
Orientation
The college or university has a documented
process for providing high school teachers in
Assessment-based Learning credit programs
with ongoing orientation and training in the
college’s or university’s course learning
outcomes and assessment criteria and
expectations, and suggested strategies for
curriculum and pedagogy.
Required orientations or trainings
for new Assessment Based
Learning Credit teachers.
● Agenda(s) for trainings and/or
● Meeting notes and/or
● Other records
Page 34 of 44
Standard Descriptor Evidence Required /What
reviewers look for
Requisites 4
(ABL-R4)
Student Rights
and
Responsibilities
The college’s or university’s Assessment-
based Learning credit policies and
expectations are clearly communicated to
high school students, teachers, faculty, staff
and stakeholders. This information includes:
high school and college/university contact
information; available Assessment-based
Learning credit opportunities and
assessment requirements; tuition and fee
structure; cost to the student associated with
award or non-award of credit; impact on
financial aid; and the applicability and
transferability of credits.
Published students’ rights and
responsibilities and information
about the transfer of credit.
● Student guide (or link)
● Information for the transfer of
credit.
● How comprehensive costs are
communicated to students;
must be transparent.
Page 35 of 44
Standard Descriptor Evidence Required /What
reviewers look for
ASSESSMENT: Describe how your ABL program assessment practices ensure alignment between college
course outcomes, student learning, and awarded credit.
Assessment 1
(ABL-A1)
The college/university ensures concurrent enrollment students’ proficiency of learning outcomes is measured using comparable grading standards and assessment methods to on campus sections.
Required Evidence: 1. A Statement of Equivalency written by each discipline’s faculty liaison that follows the NACEP Statement of Equivalency Guidelines. A standard response is not appropriate. 2. Paired student assessment tools from on-campus and concurrent enrollment sections – one paired example from each discipline for side-by-side comparisons (such as final exam, lab exercise, essay assignment, or grading rubric).
Assessment 2
(ABL-A2)
Faculty
Involvement in
Assessment
College or university faculty conduct a process
for assessment of student learning and collection
of the required evidence for awarding credit.
Through the Assessment-based Learning credit
partnership, high school students have the
opportunity to demonstrate attainment of the
college or university’s course-specific learning
outcomes associated with the credit to be
awarded.
Faculty involvement in the
assessments.
● Narrative description of how
faculty oversee the assessment
process
Page 36 of 44
Standard Descriptor Evidence Required /What
reviewers look for
TRANSCRIPTION & TRANSFERABILITY: Describe the process your Assessment Based Learning Credit
program uses to award and transcript credit, provide documentation to support credits awarded and
student learning outcomes attained, and ensure compliance with all applicable policies and standards.
Transcription &
Transferability
(ABL-TR1)
Transcripts
All Assessment-based Learning credit that is
awarded by the college or university must be
transcripted to comply with applicable state and
federal regulations and accreditation policies
and standards. Notations on the transcript
should identify Assessment-Based Learning
credits.
Notation on the transcript.
● Example college or university
transcript or model of
expected transcript indicating
notation
Transcription &
Transferability
(ABL-TR2)
Student Records
Documentation used to support credits awarded
will be maintained as part of the student’s
official institutional academic record to ensure
compliance with standards set forth by the
American Association of Collegiate Registrars
and Admissions Officers, Northwest Commission
on Colleges and University, and state
administrative rules.
Registrar procedures to handle
ABL student records.
● Narrative describing the policy
and process for retaining
evidence for awarding credit in
official academic record
Transcription &
Transferability
(ABL-TR3)
Information for
Transfer of ABL
Colleges and universities that award
Assessment-based Learning credit will document
the student learning outcomes and assessment
strategies used to award credit for courses
eligible for Assessment-based Learning credit.
This information will be provided, upon request,
to the student who earned the credit or
receiving institution to encourage transferability
of credits earned.
Process for requesting course
information for transfer beyond
transcript.
● Narrative describing the
process the college or
university follows to share
college syllabus, student
learning outcomes and
assessments with other
institutions
Transcription &
Transferability
(ABL-TR4)
Transparency
around Transfer
Each receiving institution shall determine the
transferability of Assessment-based Learning
credit granted from other institutions in
accordance with institutional policies and
accreditation standards.
Clear information around transfer
for students, families, and
partners.
● Information for students that
credit transferability is up to
the receiving institution
● Link to information in student
guide
Appendix VII: Rubrics for Reviewers
High school based college credit partnership – Dual Credit
Category Exceeds (5) Meets 4 (3) 2 Needs Improvement (1)
General evaluation of evidence Is there alignment between the college or university catalog and the high school based offering.
Evidence submitted aligns very well with narrative statement and demonstrates model best practices in the specific categories of the standards. Evidence documents are provided for each of the standards.
Evidence submitted aligns with narrative statement and demonstrates adherence to the specific category of the standards. Evidence documents are provided for each of the standards.
Evidence submitted does not align with narrative statement. One or more standards are missing evidence documents.
Curriculum Does the Dual Credit program engage partner high schools to ensure that college or university courses taught at the high schools meet all of the college or university curriculum expectations.
Courses offered in the high school match the courses in the college or university catalog, and reflect a broad array of subjects, focusing on the most transferable courses/credits. Students receive a college or university transcript and timely advising about how to use it. Courses at high school and college have aligned pedagogical approaches.
Courses offered in the high school match the courses in the college or university catalog. Students receive a college or university transcript. Courses at high school and college have aligned pedagogical approaches.
Courses offered in the high school do not match courses in the college or university catalog. Students do not receive a college or university transcript. Pedagogical approaches are not aligned.
Page 38 of 44
Faculty
Is there a clear process to
approve high school teachers
for Dual Credit. Are there
processes to facilitate
ongoing collegial interaction
between approved high
school teachers and the
colleges or university’s
faculty and administration.
The process for qualifying teachers
is the same for on campus and high
school instructors. There is an
exemplary policy for addressing
non-compliance of instructors in the
partnership.
There is a full and in depth initial
orientation and robust ongoing
collegial interaction between high
school teachers and college or
university faculty to ensure
alignment of courses content,
delivery, assessment, and
evaluation. Best practices such as
professional learning communities
are set up and functioning
sustainably.
The process for qualifying
teaching faculty is the same
for campus-and high school-
based instructors. There is a
policy for addressing non-
compliance of instructors in
the partnership.
There is initial orientation and
ongoing collegial interaction
between high school teachers
and college or university
faculty to ensure alignment of
courses content, delivery,
assessment, and evaluation.
There are unexplained
differences between the
qualifications for campus and
the high school teaching.
There is no policy about non-
compliance for instructors.
There is no evidence provided
about initial orientation or
ongoing collegial interaction
between high school and
college or university faculty.
Student
The rights and
responsibilities of a being a
college student, including the
importance of registering for
the college or university
course, what it means to
build a permanent college
transcript, and how the
college credits effect their
long-term educational and
career goals are clearly
communicated.
There is intentional and timely
advising and communication to
students and families about college,
credit, pre-requisites, and
add/drop/withdraw dates. The
dates align with college or university
timeframes for the paired course.
There is evidence of integrated
learning experiences around college
and career readiness promote
student progression and successful
transition to career and/or
education beyond high school.
There is intentional and timely
advising and communication
to students about college,
credit, pre-requisites and
add/drop/withdraw dates.
The dates align with college or
university timeframes for the
paired course.
There is some communication
to students about the logistics
of taking college courses in
high school. The information is
not in a format that students
respond to, or not early
enough to help them make
informed decisions, or
understand fully and build on
their career and educational
goals. The dates do not align
with college or university
timeframes for the paired
Page 39 of 44
course.
Assessment
Dual Credit program ensures
that students are assessed
comparably to their college
or university counterparts.
The program facilitates high levels of
high school and college or university
faculty communication and
collaboration about assessments,
and those assessments are
sufficiently similar in achievement,
grading, and methods. Evidence
reflects the joint faculty work and
the similarities and levels of expert
innovation that serve as best
practices statewide and nationally.
The program facilitates high
school and college or
university faculty
communication about
assessments, and those
assessments are sufficiently
similar in achievement,
grading, and methods.
Evidence reflects the joint
faculty work and the
similarities.
The evidence provided shows
some comparable features of
assessment but not in all of
the required components:
achievement, grading, and
methods. There is little or no
evidence of teachers and
faculty working together.
Continuous Improvement
Describe how your Dual
Credit program administers
and uses end of term student
course evaluations for
program improvement.
In addition to a student course
evaluation there are other surveys
of students, families, teachers, and
partners about teaching, learning,
and transitional supports provided
by the program. Results are built
into a continuous improvement
cycle with multiple avenues for
stakeholder input.
There is an end of course
evaluation completed by
students and the program
uses the data collected to
improve over time. Evidence
includes blank evaluation
form, and summary of the
results for a given year or
other stated time period.
There is no end of course
evaluation or the response
rate on the evaluation
administered is less than 12%.
Results are not reviewed by
program staff or faculty for
continuous improvement over
time. Evidence of the
evaluation, response rate, or
use of results is missing.
Page 40 of 44
High school based college credit partnership – Sponsored Dual Credit
Category Exceeds (5) Meets 4 (3) 2 Needs Improvement (1)
General evaluation of evidence
Is there alignment between the
college or university catalog and
the high school based offering.
Evidence submitted aligns very
well with narrative statement and
demonstrates model best
practices in the specific categories
of the standards. Evidence
documents are provided for each
of the standards.
Evidence submitted aligns with
narrative statement and
demonstrates adherence to the
specific category of the
standards. Evidence documents
are provided for each of the
standards.
Evidence submitted does not align
with narrative statement. One or
more standards are missing
evidence documents.
Curriculum
Does the Sponsored Dual Credit
program engage partner high
schools to ensure that college or
university courses taught at the
high schools meet all of the
college or university curriculum
expectations.
Courses offered in the high school
match the courses in the college
or university catalog, and reflect a
broad array of subjects, focusing
on the most transferable
courses/credits. Students receive
a college or university transcript
and timely advising about how to
use it. Courses at high school and
college have aligned pedagogical
approaches.
Courses offered in the high school
match the courses in the college
or university catalog. Students
receive a college or university
transcript. Courses at high school
and college have aligned
pedagogical approaches.
Courses offered in the high school
do not match courses in the
college or university catalog.
Students do not receive a college
or university transcript.
Pedagogical approaches are not
aligned.
Page 41 of 44
Faculty
Is there a clear process to
approve high school teachers
for Sponsored Dual Credit. Are
there processes to facilitate
ongoing collegial interaction
between approved high school
teachers and the colleges or
university’s faculty and
administration.
The process for qualifying
sponsored teachers is clear and
widely available to high school
instructors. There is an
exemplary policy for addressing
non-compliance of instructors
in the partnership and
pathways to partnership for
instructors that do not initially
qualify.
There is a full and in depth
initial orientation and robust
ongoing collegial interaction
between high school teachers
and college or university faculty
to ensure alignment of courses
content, delivery, assessment,
and evaluation. Best practices
such as professional learning
communities are set up and
functioning sustainably.
The process for qualifying
sponsored teachers is clear and
available to high school-based
instructors. There is a policy for
addressing non-compliance of
faculty and high school based
instructors in the partnership.
There is initial orientation and
ongoing collegial interaction
between high school teachers
and college or university faculty
to ensure alignment of courses
content, delivery, assessment,
and evaluation.
There are unexplained
differences between the
qualifications for campus and
the high school teaching. There
is no policy about non-
compliance for instructors.
There is no evidence provided
about initial orientation and/or
ongoing collegial interaction
between high school and
college or university faculty.
Information/data about
teaching partners is incomplete
or not provided.
Students
The rights and responsibilities
of a being a college student,
including the importance of
registering for the college or
university course, what it
means to build a permanent
college transcript, and how the
college credits effect their
There is intentional and timely
advising and communication to
students and families about
college, credit, pre-requisites,
and add/drop/withdraw dates.
The dates align with college or
university timeframes for the
paired course. There is
evidence of integrated learning
experiences around college and
There is intentional and timely
advising and communication to
students about college, credit,
pre-requisites and
add/drop/withdraw dates. The
dates align with college or
university timeframes for the
paired course.
There is some communication
to students about the logistics
of taking college courses in high
school. The information is not
in a format that students
respond to, or not early enough
to help them make informed
decisions, or understand fully
and build on their career and
educational goals. The dates do
Page 42 of 44
long-term educational and
career goals are clearly
communicated.
career readiness to promote
student progression and
successful transition to career
and/or education beyond high
school.
not align with college or
university timeframes for the
paired course.
Assessment
Sponsored Dual Credit
program ensures that students
are assessed comparably to
their college or university
counterparts.
There is strong evidence for
each of the assessment
standards and the evidence
provides enough information to
compare the high school course
to the campus course. It is
obvious that the high school
course provides comparable
standards of achievement,
grading practices, and
assessment methods.
There is evidence of
comparable standards of
achievement, grading practices,
and assessment methods. The
assessment methods, grading,
and student achievement are as
similar to other sections of the
course on campus.
Some parts of the assessment
process are similar to campus
courses while one or more
elements are not similar
(Student achievement, grading
practices, or methods of
assessment). Standards for high
school students are lower than
for college students.
Continuous Improvement
Describe how your Sponsored
Dual Credit program
administers and uses end of
term student course
evaluations for program
improvement.
The institution uses multiple
avenues to gather information
for continuous improvement,
including anonymous end of
course evaluations, other
surveys of teachers, parents, or
additional stakeholders.
Information is reviewed and
used by program staff for
continuous improvement.
The program conducts an
anonymous end of course
evaluation for each course
where students provide
feedback on their experience
for continuous improvement.
Response rate is at least 12%.
Information is reviewed by
program staff for continuous
improvement.
There is no end of course
evaluation conducted or the
response rate is less than 12%.
The end of course feedback is
not anonymous or is used to
evaluate individual teachers.
There is no evidence that
information is reviewed or used
for continuous improvement.
Page 43 of 44
High school based college credit partnership – Assessment Based Learning Credit
Category Exceeds (5) Meets 4 (3) 2 Needs Improvement (1)
General evaluation of evidence
Is there alignment between the
college or university catalog and
the high school based offering.
Evidence submitted aligns very
well with narrative statement and
demonstrates model best practices
in the specific categories of the
standards. Evidence documents
are provided for each of the
standards.
Evidence submitted aligns with
narrative statement and
demonstrates adherence to the
specific category of the standards.
Evidence documents are provided
for each of the standards.
Evidence submitted does not align
with narrative statement. One or
more standards are missing
evidence documents.
Requisites
The college or university has
policies, procedures, and
processes for awarding
Assessment Based Learning credit
that are implemented and are
transparent to students, teachers,
faculty, and staff.
Evidence includes both the board
approved public facing policy and
detailed memorandum of
understanding including roles and
responsibilities of the various
sector partners. The partnership
includes faculty responsibilities
around curriculum, orientation,
non-compliance, and student
rights and responsibilities.
Evidence shows that the policies,
procedures, and processes
described in the policy and
memorandum are implemented.
The evidence includes the higher
education partner’(s) policy that is
public facing or otherwise may be
easily accessed by stakeholders.
There is evidence that the policies,
procedures and processes
described in the policy are
implemented. The partnership
includes faculty responsibilities
around curriculum, orientation,
non-compliance, and student
rights and responsibilities.
The evidence does not include
institutional policy and/or the
policy is not readily accessible to
stakeholders. There is little to no
evidence that the procedures and
processes referenced in the
narrative are implemented.
Page 44 of 44
Assessment
Assessment practices are designed
by college or university faculty
and ensure alignment of college
course outcomes, student
learning, and awarded credit.
Evidence shows that there is
robust and meaningful
collaboration between high school
teachers and college or university
faculty around design and delivery
of assessments. It is obvious that
the high school course provides
comparable standards of
achievement, grading practices,
and assessment methods.
There are processes set up to
ensure faculty involvement in the
assessment and evidence shows
comparable standards of
achievement, grading practices,
and assessment methods.
Generally there is evidence of
common course outcomes and
alignment of student learning and
awarded credit.
There is little to now evidence of
faculty involvement in the design
of assessments, the evidence does
not show comparable standards of
achievement, grading practices, or
assessment methods. There is little
to no evidence of alignment of
college course outcomes, student
learning, and awarded credit.
Transcription & Transfer
College or university has a process
to award and transcript credit
including maintenance of student
records, handling of requests for
course information, and
communication to students about
transferring higher education
credits
There is a clear and consistent
process for award and
transcription of college or
university credit. Student records
are maintained and there is a clear
and consistent process to share
course outline information with
transfer institutions. There is clear
and consistent communication to
students and families about
transfer of credit it higher
education.
There is a process to award and
transcript college or university
credit to high school students that
is consistently implemented with
student record keeping and course
database that allows program
admin to reply to requests for
course outlines. There is
information provided to students
about the transfer of credit in
higher education.
There is little or no information
about the process of credit award
and maintenance of student
records. There is little to no or
false information for students and
transfer institutions about courses
and how the courses transfer
among colleges and universities.